Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)

    Privacy Recent WHOIS Report Overlooking Fundamental Issue?
    posted by michael on Wednesday June 16 2004, @03:25PM

    Anonymous writes "In a recent CircleID article, Rod Dixon says: 'Each [WHOIS] Task Force recently published a report posted on ICANN's website on recommendations for modifications or improvements to WHOIS. The Task Force recommendations include proposals ranging from a recommendation to notify those who may be included in the database of the possible uses of WHOIS data to one that recommends ICANN offer the Internet community "tiered access" to serve as a vague mechanism to balance privacy against the needs of public access. Too many of the recommendations seem to be framed by those who view Internet users with hostility, such as the recommendation to punish domain name users when a domain name is cancelled or suspended for "false contact data," by canceling all other registrations with identical contact data. In the main, however, recommendations reflect at least a sentimental, if not serious, attempt to balance competing interests. Still, something fundamental was overlooked by the Task Forces: a reflective reconsideration whether WHOIS should be an entirely public database.'"

      ICANNWatch Login  


    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

      Related Links  
    · CircleID
    · ICANN
    · recent CircleID article
    · Rod Dixon
    · published a report
    · More Privacy stories
    · Also by michael
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Recent WHOIS Report Overlooking Fundamental Issue? | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 8 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Agreed, but...
    by KarlAuerbach on Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:10PM (#13761)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
    I do agree that there is the never-answered, but frequently asked, question of why the DNS whois registration database ought to be public at all.

    In addition, there is a lack of questioning about who is going to bear the costs of collecting this data, publishing it, and controlling access to it.

    Presently this cost is borne by the domain name registrants and it reduces the profit margins of registrars.

    That is an unfair situation. The costs should be borne by those who are benefiting from the data.

    It makes sense that every DNS whois query ought to cost the querier $50(US) with that amount being split 50%/50% between the registry maintaining the data and the data subject (the domain name registrant.)

    If the person making the inquiry finds that there has been something actionable and illicit going on, then that person can add that access fee to their list of actual costs and damages for which they seek compensation.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Should they let the false data stand then?
    by anotherblackhat on Thursday June 17 2004, @11:32AM (#13766)
    User #3427 Info
    ... such as the recommendation to punish domain name users when a domain name is cancelled or suspended for "false contact data," by canceling all other registrations with identical contact data.

    If you accept that it's ok to cancel or suspend one domain for having "false contact data",
    then you should also accept as ok cancelling or suspending all domains with the same "false contact data".

    The whole idea is ludicrous though - if they can't use "false" data, then they'll pick a domain they don't like, and use that data.

    Might I humbly suggest;

    Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
    (ICANN) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
    4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
    Marina del Rey, CA 92092
    Phone: 310-823-9358
    Fax..: 310-823-8649
    Email: icann@icann.org

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: whois quid pro quo
    by jberryhill on Friday June 18 2004, @04:58PM (#13772)
    User #3013 Info

    There are some partially effective ways of doing this already. People have been known to put HTML tags into their whois data, so that they can monitor whois lookups by watching their server logs.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:whois quid pro quo
    by KarlAuerbach on Friday June 18 2004, @05:58PM (#13775)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
    I made that suggestion to the working groups over a year ago, i.e. around the time of the Montreal ICANN meeting. It was, of course, pretty much ignorred.

    I stated the requirement as a kind of gazette in which there would be a couple of different reports.

    One public report would be the names of people who were asking, and how often they asked, but *not* what names they were asking for.

    Another public report would be the names being asked about, but not who was asking.

    But each domain name holder could obtain a private report about exactly who was asking about their name and the reasons why that person claimed that he/she had the right to look.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:

    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com